Larry Dieken v. State, 2014 Tex. App. LEXIS 4103

Dieken pled guilty to first-degree aggravated assault with a deadly weapon; jury sentenced him to life imprisonment and a $10,000 fine.
Trial court orally imposed the jury’s punishment and ordered payment of fines and costs.
Two concurrent orders: a written judgment including $524.50 for attorney’s fees and an order appointing appellate counsel.
Appellate counsel filed an Anders brief; Dieken filed a pro se brief challenging various issues, including attorney’s fees.
Court held no arguable issues on conviction; addressed whether Dieken must reimburse court-appointed trial counsel fees.
Court determined it could have impliedly found a material change in finances and Dieken’s ability to pay $524.50.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
May fees for court-appointed counsel be imposed on appeal?	Dieken argues no sufficient basis to impose fees.	Dieken contends lack of evidence of ability to pay.	Yes; fees were properly imposed based on implied material change and ability to pay.
Sufficiency of evidence of material change and ability to pay	Dieken contends no change or ability evidenced.	Dieken retained counsel and third party would pay some fees; evidence supports change and ability.	Evidence reasonably supported a material change and ability to pay.

Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967) (procedural framework for Anders briefs)
Wiley v. State, 410 S.W.3d 313 (Tex. Crim. App. 2013) (indigence and reimbursement framework)
Mayer v. State, 309 S.W.3d 552 (Tex. Crim. App. 2010) (indigence spectrum and ability-to-pay analysis)
Fulmer v. State, 401 S.W.3d 305 (Tex. App.—San Antonio 2013) (indigence and appointing counsel; reconsideration guidance)
McFatridge v. State, 309 S.W.3d 1 (Tex. Crim. App. 2010) (distinguishing indigence for different purposes)
Whitehead v. State, 130 S.W.3d 866 (Tex. Crim. App. 2004) (reconsideration upon change in financial status)